HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Will BoB force Elizabeth ...

Mon May 16, 2016, 10:52 AM

Will BoB force Elizabeth Warren out of the US Senate? Bob = Bernie or Bust

The DNC and Hillary and so on have to figure out the best way to keep the White House and do the least amount of harm to existing, effective Senate members like Elizabeth and Bernie.

If Hillary wins, and she picks Elizabeth (Bernie would never do it, which is good) the "I cant vote for Hillary" concerned citizens are then more likely to vote for her, not all, but at least some, maybe most even.

Bernie would never agree to be VP and Hillary would never ask, but she might have to consider Elizabeth as this "group" of concerned citizens are clearly not voting for the Democratic candidate otherwise.

Now, all of us seasoned political junkies know that the VP is a meaningless job and Elizabeth is thousands times more effective and valuable as a Senator (and maybe one day president), but that allowing Donald Drumpf to be president is not an option, cant happen, period.

So, Hillary may have to consider doing this harm to the liberal cause by pulling one of the two most liberal and aggressive Senators out of the game, so as to appease the "concerned citizens".

30 replies, 1422 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 30 replies Author Time Post
Reply Will BoB force Elizabeth Warren out of the US Senate? Bob = Bernie or Bust (Original post)
Jackie Wilson Said May 2016 OP
TCJ70 May 2016 #1
Jackie Wilson Said May 2016 #2
Hortensis May 2016 #6
Jackie Wilson Said May 2016 #8
Hortensis May 2016 #11
Jackie Wilson Said May 2016 #13
Hortensis May 2016 #14
Jackie Wilson Said May 2016 #15
Hortensis May 2016 #22
apnu May 2016 #7
TCJ70 May 2016 #23
Demsrule86 May 2016 #27
HooptieWagon May 2016 #3
Jackie Wilson Said May 2016 #5
bobbobbins01 May 2016 #4
Demsrule86 May 2016 #28
Eric J in MN May 2016 #9
Jackie Wilson Said May 2016 #10
Eric J in MN May 2016 #12
Exilednight May 2016 #16
Jackie Wilson Said May 2016 #17
Exilednight May 2016 #18
Prism May 2016 #19
Jackie Wilson Said May 2016 #21
Skwmom May 2016 #20
Tierra_y_Libertad May 2016 #24
SFnomad May 2016 #25
Sunlei May 2016 #29
Sunlei May 2016 #26
mmonk May 2016 #30

Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Original post)

Mon May 16, 2016, 10:55 AM

1. I believe Warren already said she wouldn't consider it...

...so that would be something if they pulled it off. The thing is, Hillary is still Hillary, and her VP pick isn't going to change that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TCJ70 (Reply #1)

Mon May 16, 2016, 10:56 AM

2. True for some, that their personal feelings and needs are more important than life on the planet

but some wont continue down that road of certain destruction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Reply #2)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:16 AM

6. Bernie effective? You might want to read

Ralph Nader's letter accusing him of negligence and extreme ineffectiveness.

I'm just wondering why the SBSers have dragged her out from under the bus. You now know conclusively that she does not endorse Bernie for president and that it clearly could have made all the difference. She was a Republican most of her life, too, so we know she'd never have supported him even in her college days.

What a shame Hispanic progressive Julian Castro wasn't able to work miracles and sell millions of foreclosed homes to nonprofits that didn't want them, or didn't exist. I understand his name is mud now because as HUD Secretary he was required to preside over offloading foreclosed properties to the only entities that could afford them, profiteering banks. Even requiring the new owners to hold them for a full year, in case the defaulted mortgagees could reclaim them before selling (while they continued to deteriorate), didn't rehabilitate him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #6)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:18 AM

8. Up till recently he was unable to be effective legislatively because his ideas were considered

too radical, now that they are being considered by many, he can be extremely effective.

Now the way to respond what I just said is

"Yes, you are right, let's see if more get on board with him, if not then he is still not effective"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Reply #8)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:34 AM

11. How does that explain his refusal to work with

others to sponsor and pass legislation? According to Nader's fed-up letter, this habitual negligence and refusal to step up when opportunity knocked was Bernie's normal pattern and went on for decades.

Btw, Bernie could do very little by himself. He would need Congress. Specifically, he would need all those people whose phone calls he couldn't be bothered to return, plus hundreds of others. He would need all the people who refused to endorse him for president.

You're hoping for miracles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #11)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:37 AM

13. Refusal? Not true, what he refused to do in most cases was water down his legislation

to the point of it making it ineffective.

If you can prove that he had the opportunity to get something passed and didnt solely because he didnt want to cooperate or share, then do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Reply #13)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:40 AM

14. NADER and other strong leftists required him

to "water down legislation" before they'd support it? Somehow I really doubt that, Jackie. Are you imagining that he wouldn't support their legislation because it was too "third-way"?

Did you read Nader's letter? It's damning. Or at very least for genuine progressives, the real thing, it should be gravely concerning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #14)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:42 AM

15. I was a big supporter of Nader for a very long time, now I am not sure what he is doing.

Havent read the letter, I worry that he may not be objective.

I will read it if it is short. Pretty busy right now with GOTV

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Reply #15)

Mon May 16, 2016, 12:34 PM

22. Fwiw, it's dated March 6, 2014.

As for objective, that's probably not Nader's strongest quality. I read that he and Bernie had a falling out back in 1996 when Bernie endorsed Bill Clinton for reelection instead of Nader's initial run for president, to supposedly set him up to win in 2000. Which frankly sounds only sensible:

In an August interview, Sanders explained his endorsement of Clinton on grounds that his top priority was to prevent a Republican takeover of the White House. The incumbent president is "clearly preferable" to Bob Dole on a host of issues, the congressman argued then. Sanders further maintained that Nader was not a viable contender and could expect to get "at most 2 or 3 percent of the vote nationally."


And, of course, he did run in 2000 also, a symbolic "statement" run, apparently without Bernie's endorsement then either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TCJ70 (Reply #1)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:17 AM

7. What if Bernie is the VP pick?

A remote chance, sure, but let's pretend its reality. What will Bernie supporters do then?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apnu (Reply #7)

Mon May 16, 2016, 12:35 PM

23. That's a wrench in the works...

...but like you said, of all the possibilities that is the remotest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TCJ70 (Reply #1)

Mon May 16, 2016, 01:12 PM

27. She left the door open

Everyone says that because Bernie people erroneously reported what she said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Original post)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:09 AM

3. Her term doesn't end until 2019,...

 

...so the 2016 election won't affect her. You Hillarians wouldn't look so clueless by doing a little basic research.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #3)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:14 AM

5. While it is technically possible she could serve as both at the same time,

they would never do that in a million years so she would be replaced

And I am a Bernie voter, was a Bernie supporter before you knew who he was, probably.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Original post)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:11 AM

4. I hope so, because that would mean Bernie picked her as his V.P.

I'm with her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bobbobbins01 (Reply #4)

Mon May 16, 2016, 01:13 PM

28. Bernie does not need a VP pick

Only a concession speech.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Original post)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:21 AM

9. Warren would be more powerful as VP

She was a law professor. HRC asks for her advice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eric J in MN (Reply #9)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:21 AM

10. Nonsense and you know it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Reply #10)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:35 AM

12. I've liked Warren since before she ran for Senate

...and I want her to be VP because I think she'd be more powerful that way.

Massachusetts has another liberal Senator, Ed Markey, and would probably replace Warren with a liberal (after a six month wait) if Warren became VP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Original post)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:49 AM

16. she's not picking Elizabeth.

1. Liz said she would not accept the position if offered.

2. Mass has a Republican governor and would appoint a Republican to fill her seat.

3. Hillary will view a dual female ticket as too week to win hawkish independents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Exilednight (Reply #16)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:50 AM

17. I know but I was trying to make a different point, about how destructive Bob are being

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Reply #17)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:52 AM

18. then make a valid argument grounded in reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Original post)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:52 AM

19. This is stupid

 

So, so stupid.

So. Very. Stupid.

Sanders supporter, huh?

Sanders supporter?

Okedoke.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Prism (Reply #19)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:56 AM

21. Before you knew who he was.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Original post)

Mon May 16, 2016, 11:53 AM

20. Stop trying to blame the Bernie Supporters. Nothing like REFUSING to accept responsibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Original post)

Mon May 16, 2016, 12:38 PM

24. Both Elizabeth and Hillary are adults capable of making their own decisions.

 

Neither "have to" do anything or even "have to" consider doing anything to please anyone.

Even voters who Hillary and her brand of politics have alienated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Original post)

Mon May 16, 2016, 12:58 PM

25. The true BoB crowd is smaller than you think

 

Just like their predecessors, the PUMAs, they think they're more powerful and greater in number than they really are. In the end, the PUMAs were irrelevant and the few actual BoB'ers will find themselves in the same situation.

I believe that a number of the people that say they're BoB'ers here are actually really Republicans ... just trying to agitate and cause trouble. Sadly, they've succeeded all too well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SFnomad (Reply #25)

Mon May 16, 2016, 01:13 PM

29. of course a lot of them are republicans. "Anyone" can make a twitter account* and cause trouble.

*or go to open rallies/events, register on message boards like DU.

People have to be very naive to think Republicans wouldn't use a simple "divide and conquer" as part of their strategy. It works great on DU. Republicans have had from 2006 to work on anti-Mrs. Clinton crap. 10 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Original post)

Mon May 16, 2016, 01:00 PM

26. Senator Sanders has the VP door wide open. They'll talk about it when *every State* has voted.

Mrs. Warren barely got in with the constant attacks from Republicans. She has already said, she doesn't want to be VP. She will have enough trouble trying to hold her seat against republican attacks. Let Mrs Warren win another term as Senator. Who knows? in 4-8 years she may run as President/VP.

Republicans go all out hardball for Congress & Senate seats, they spend more time and money on those elections then the presidents position.

I don't agree with you the "VP is a meaningless job". Biden doesn't' toot his own horn' after every accomplishment he personally worked/works hard on. If 'god forbid' something happened to President O, I think our VP would do a good job as president.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Original post)

Mon May 16, 2016, 01:24 PM

30. A threat I see. Want to match it in November?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread